Quantitative analysis reveals socioeconomic vulnerability and low-income conditions in Palmeiras II, highlighting urgent social policies.
Objective: The objective of this study is to analyze the socioeconomic profile of residents of the Palmeiras II Informal Urban Nucleus based on data obtained from a socioeconomic survey, in order to understand the social and economic conditions that characterize the resident population. Theoretical Framework: The theoretical framework is based on studies and legal frameworks on the Brazilian urbanization process, urban informality, and land regularization (Brasil, 2017; Campos & Branco, 2021; Maricato & Cunha, 2022), integrated with analyses of socio-spatial vulnerability and informal urban centers in Fortaleza/CE (Belmino et al., 2017). Method: This research adopts a quantitative and descriptive approach, using data from the socioeconomic survey conducted in the Palmeiras II Informal Urban Nucleus, a product of the Fortaleza Land Regularization Program (REURBFOR). The information was collected through structured questionnaires applied on-site and subsequently processed to create tables and graphs that summarize the analyzed profile. Results and Discussion: The results indicate high socioeconomic vulnerability, with a predominance of women heads of households, a Black/mixed-race population, low levels of education and informal labor market participation, in addition to a predominance of low-income families, whose incomes, for the most part, range from no income to up to three minimum wages, a condition that guides the classification of the Nucleus under the Reurb-S modality. Research Implications: The implications of this research focus on providing subsidies for urban planning, territorial management, and land regularization processes, by highlighting socioeconomic patterns that characterize informal urban settlements. The results contribute, above all, to the implementation of social and housing policies in vulnerable areas. Originality/Value: Socially, it reveals the needs and priorities of families; from an urban planning perspective, it indicates where to prioritize infrastructure and facilities; in the legal and urban regularization context, it supports the adoption of the correct approach; for the municipality, it provides practical information for planning and executing public actions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Marques et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: